Last Friday, the federal district court overseeing the BMI consent decree rejected the Department of Justice’s interpretation, holding that it did not prohibit so-called “fractional licensing.” In an opinion with little meaningful analysis, the court dismissed DOJ’s reading of the plain language of the consent decree, calling the consent decree language merely “descriptive.”
The following be attributed to Raza Panjwani, Policy Counsel at Public Knowledge:
“We are deeply disappointed by Judge Stanton’s summary dismissal of the Department of Justice’s carefully-considered interpretation of the BMI consent decree. The plain language of the consent decree, BMI’s statements to the DOJ, BMI’s marketing language about its licenses, and appellate precedent all support the DOJ’s interpretation. Fractional licensing threatens to deprive the public of access to music by undermining a licensing marketplace that generates over a billion dollars in revenue annually for BMI alone, and which hundreds of thousands of business and outlets rely on to use and play music. This decision introduces uncertainty for users, opens the door to anticompetitive behavior, and should be appealed and reversed.”
Members of the media may contact Communications Director Shiva Stella with inquiries, interview requests, or to join the Public Knowledge press list at email@example.com or 405-249-9435.